Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic resection of gastric GISTs appears technically feasible and associated with favorable outcomes. Tumor size however frequently plays a role in surgical approach with larger tumors tending toward laparotomy, raising concern that favorable outcomes reported for the laparoscopic approach may reflect this selection bias. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a prospectively collected sarcoma database, 155 primary gastric GIST resections were identified (1998-2009); 40 patients underwent successful laparoscopic resection for non-GE junction GIST and were randomly matched (1:1) by tumor size (±2.0 cm) to patients with open resection. Clinical and pathologic variables and surgical outcomes were associated with surgery type using conditional logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The two surgical approaches were comparable for clinical and pathologic variables. Median operating room (OR) time was similar, although median length of stay postsurgery was lower in the laparoscopic versus open group (4 vs. 7 days, P = 0.002), as was estimated blood loss (EBL) (25 vs. 100 ml, P = 0.006). There was no operative mortality, and 30-day morbidity was similar. Oncologic outcomes were also similar with no positive microscopic margins, and 1 recurrence in each group with a median follow-up of 34 months. There were 13 conversions overall, 5 secondary to tumor location at the GE junction or lesser curve. CONCLUSIONS: When matched for tumor size, laparoscopic resection of primary gastric GISTs ≤8 cm results in shorter hospital stays with similar OR time while maintaining sound oncologic outcomes compared with open resection.